posted at 9:21 am on March 4, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

From time to time we highlight some news items here about responsible gun owners who thwart crime by way of exercising their God given Second Amendment rights, but that really only tells one half of the story. Unfortunately, there are other tales out there across America – sadly, far too many to keep track of – where people react differently and things don’t go as well. This is one of those stories, and since I first saw it on Twitter it’s really gotten under my skin.

This event involves a couple in Annapolis, Maryland who were leaving their residence on some very important business. The girl was in the final weeks of pregnancy and had gone into labor. Her “boyfriend” went out with her to head to the hospital. That’s when things took a turn for the worse.

The couple was confronted by three men with guns as they left an apartment on Copeland Street early Sunday. When the woman’s boyfriend fled, police spokeswoman Cpl. Amy Miguez says, the suspects tried to get the woman to let them into an apartment, but she didn’t have a key.

That’s when two of the men took off in the woman’s car, Miguez says.

Because this took place in Maryland, the couple was unarmed. (Let’s face it… if you find anyone not wearing a police or military uniform in Annapolis who has a gun, odds are probably better than 99% that they’re a criminal.) So I can sympathize to a certain extent how alarmed they must have felt when confronted by three armed thugs. But the bothersome elements of this story don’t end with the bad guys or the lack of concealed carry permits in the state. Let’s revisit one phrase from the story.

When the woman’s boyfriend fled…

You ran away? While your girlfriend was standing there in labor facing down three armed hoodlums? This shoots right past the idea of whether or not you might have wanted to marry the girl after getting her in a family way (that’s a question for another day, but props for at least volunteering to go to the hospital), but having done so, how did you leave her there on the sidewalk while you bolted down the street? Yes, your safety was in danger, but for some people there comes a point in life where a man is put to a galvanizing test, and this was your moment.

Another phrase stands out.

the suspects tried to get the woman to let them into an apartment, but she didn’t have a key…

You not only abandoned her in the face of imminent violence, but you took the keys, too? She couldn’t even get back into your home. And once the car was stolen, she was essentially left on the sidewalk, wracked with labor pains. How does one wake up in the morning after delivering such a performance in a crisis and even look in the mirror?

I wish there was some overarching, positive message or lesson to take away from all this. Sadly, there is not. The good news is that the police later arrested two of the muggers and the woman made it to a local hospital. No word is available on the location or status of the “boyfriend.”

Retreat is sometimes the best tactical decision.
Bill C on March 4, 2014 at 1:24 PM

When I read retreat and tactical in the same sentence; I see the statement in a military sense or setting. In that case no, you never leave your mates behind. Never.

If you are talking about a “civilian” encounter, I guess with your statement it just depends on who can run the fastest. In that case……the old; the weak; and the less fortunate ain’t going to fair too well in most encounters. Run Forest run now has new meaning!

Went to lunch to come back and see this thread is still going. This posting sober ain’t as much fun as when tossing back a few on the couch at night. Chuckle!

Thank you.
I find that most people only read the first couple of sentences and then go off half cocked attacking me. If they would take the time and read what I write they would see that many times I’m just having some fun. They also seem to ignore many of my other posts in the thread that in most cases contradict everything I’ve said in the post that set them off. I have the most fun in global warming and gun related threads.

Lucy43 on March 4, 2014 at 1:59 PM

Bah, you are just a babe in the woods as I contradict myself without trying. That takes a lot more work than doing it on purpose!

By your logic, it was every man for himself.. And the pregnant woman can’t run, so I guess he was the winner.

melle1228 on March 4, 2014 at 2:04 PM

If she really cared for him she would have run after him and protected him by imposing her pregnant body between him and the guys with guns. I looks like neither one of them really “cared” about the other. In my case I could never protect my husband that way. For one I’m too old to get preggers and I’m a lot skinnier than him. Also, I could easily out run him, get in front and use his fat butt to shield me.

I don’t care how gauche it sounds. My wife is MY wife, and if some punk wants her, he can’t have her. He might put a hole in me, but I WILL live long enough to take him with me. I promise you, he will have to pry my twitching corpse off of himself to get that last breath, and it will taste like my blood.

CurtZHP on March 4, 2014 at 11:45 AM

Or…I came into this world kicking and screaming while covered in someone else’s blood; and I have no problem with going out the same way.

He ran away. He had no idea what they intended and he didn’t care as long as his hide was safe.

sharrukin on March 4, 2014 at 2:06 PM

So your point is that men should die for women?

When I read retreat and tactical in the same sentence; I see the statement in a military sense or setting. In that case no, you never leave your mates behind. Never.

If you are talking about a “civilian” encounter, I guess with your statement it just depends on who can run the fastest. In that case……the old; the weak; and the less fortunate ain’t going to fair too well in most encounters. Run Forest run now has new meaning!

Went to lunch to come back and see this thread is still going. This posting sober ain’t as much fun as when tossing back a few on the couch at night. Chuckle!

HonestLib on March 4, 2014 at 2:08 PM

You’re sober?

No one, so far, has made a good case for this guy sticking around. He couldn’t have helped the woman. If they intended to kill her then they surely would have killed him. By getting away the robbers have to think about him calling for help and that their time to rob was limited. We don’t know for sure but maybe that is why they did not harm her and left.

Somebody already made this point but no one was hurt. Shouldn’t we consider the fact that this guy got away as a mitigating factor in that outcome?

The Western World has quietly become a civilization that undervalues men and overvalues women, where the state forcibly transfers resources from men to women creating various perverse incentives for otherwise good women to conduct great evil against men and children, and where male nature is vilified but female nature is celebrated. This is unfair to both genders, and is a recipe for a rapid civilizational decline and displacement, the costs of which will ultimately be borne by a subsequent generation of innocent women, rather than men, as soon as 2020.

The Western World has quietly become a civilization that undervalues men and overvalues women, where the state forcibly transfers resources from men to women creating various perverse incentives for otherwise good women to conduct great evil against men and children, and where male nature is vilified but female nature is celebrated. This is unfair to both genders, and is a recipe for a rapid civilizational decline and displacement, the costs of which will ultimately be borne by a subsequent generation of innocent women, rather than men, as soon as 2020.

God, I hope you have been up front to any woman you date, marry or SIRE that you see no value in protecting them, and they are on their own. A MAN’S NATURE is to fvcking protect his mate and his young. So when this man is vilified; it isn’t his nature being vilified.

Did you actually read that yourself?
I’m curious, because your posts indicate that you’re one of the people helping that process along – “where male nature is vilified”.
You seem to want the “wussification” of men, and seem to think that should be the norm.

Did you actually read that yourself?
I’m curious, because your posts indicate that you’re one of the people helping that process along – “where male nature is vilified”.
You seem to want the “wussification” of men, and seem to think that should be the norm.

dentarthurdent on March 4, 2014 at 3:55 PM

Exactly! When did a man’s nature become “run away” instead of staying a protecting his offspring and his mate?

No – MEN would do something to try to protect them.
That might result in death, but that’s not the ultimate goal.
But I doubt you would understand that.

dentarthurdent on March 4, 2014 at 3:45 PM

The ultimate goal is not be dead. That was accomplished. Retreating from a situation in which you have no chance of winning is smart. Read Sun Tzu. Sticking around out of an outdated notion that bravery requires useless gestures of chivalry is dumb.

You seem to want the “wussification” of men, and seem to think that should be the norm.

dentarthurdent on March 4, 2014 at 3:55 PM

I have read it more than once. You should read it. The world has changed and the only way to make it change back is to make women understand that pushing men out of their roles in the world is a bad idea. It is the same idea as Atlas Shrugged. Good men go on strike so that women can see what it is like to live in a feminist society. Most women, and that includes the “conservative” women who populate this website, hold decidedly feminist opinions about men’s roles. That is what I am fighting and more men are seeing this reality everyday.

God, I hope you have been up front to any woman you date, marry or SIRE that you see no value in protecting them, and they are on their own. A MAN’S NATURE is to fvcking protect his mate and his young. So when this man is vilified; it isn’t his nature being vilified.

melle1228 on March 4, 2014 at 3:55 PM

I protect my wife. We live in a state with very few of these animals around. Man’s nature has been changed by women moving into the workforce and demanding equal pay. Equal pay is a liberal, feminist notion. The conservative position should be that businesses and workers should be free to contract their own wages without interference from the gov’t.

I used to live in Annapolis. It’s a very liberal, progressive place, very proud of their Bay and their pretty little communities. Every morning, all these proud little progs start up their Priuses and stream out of Annapolis for Baltimore and Washington, where they work. Right at the Gates of Annapolis is where this crime went down, Robinwood or Newtowne 21, I don’t remember which. The mostly white liberals are convinced they have a diverse population, but really all the blacks are shoved out to the perimeter by the Gates of Annapolis. Real City of Hypocrites, if you ask me. A real bunch of phoneys.

They have this farcical clown show of a City Government where one of the Alderman, Ken Kirby is a actually welfare recipient and was almost busted in a drug raid. Oh also they have a geo-thermal energy plant Downtown that cost like $50 million and the City Council spends hours just debating what color their stupid little “legislative chamber” should be painted. Real bunch of phoneys if you ask me.

The ultimate goal is not be dead. That was accomplished. Retreating from a situation in which you have no chance of winning is smart. Read Sun Tzu. Sticking around out of an outdated notion that bravery requires useless gestures of chivalry is dumb.
Bill C on March 4, 2014 at 4:01 PM

I’ve read it – and what you’re talking about is not what it says.
You ever been in the military? I doubt it.
Your comments so far indicate a totally self-centered pu$$y who is unwilling to risk his own skin for others.
If you really believe “useless gestures of chivalry is dumb” (and BTW – sticking around would not have been useless), then you are the personification of the villification of male nature.

The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

Most women, and that includes the “conservative” women who populate this website, hold decidedly feminist opinions about men’s roles. That is what I am fighting and more men are seeing this reality everyday.

Bill C on March 4, 2014 at 4:01 PM

You’re fighting it in a mighty strange way.
Oh, and I would put a lot of HotAir’s women commenters’ conservatism up against yours (despite some good words you spout now and then) any day. (BTW, “equal pay” isn’t supported by any of the conservative women commenters on this website if it is mandated by government, based on what I’ve seen – and I’ve been around this site lurking at a minimum since Ed came over from Captain’s Quarters.)

Look, you’re only trying to save what little masculinity you have left. If you want to think that the guy did the right thing by running away, fine. You have the right to be a coward and a liar but you’re only digging your own hole deeper by justifying your position.

The fact that you’re only trying to seek attention on this site also shows that you’re as narcissistic as Obama.

My husband has told me many times that if we found ourselves in some sort of trouble with hoodlums, I am to run away as fast as I can because if I can get away, he can, but he will never leave me behind. I hope the fellows who are defending the fleeing man will forewarn the women in their lives–mothers, wives, girlfriends, daughters–than when facing danger, the women are on their own.

Most women, and that includes the “conservative” women who populate this website, hold decidedly feminist opinions about men’s roles. That is what I am fighting and more men are seeing this reality everyday.

Bill C on March 4, 2014 at 4:01 PM

What is feminist about thinking a man should protect a woman? If I as a hotair female was a raving feminist, I would be screeching that the little woman could protect herself.

And I have YET to see an actual conservative hotair woman espouse “equal work/equal pay’ through government force.

I seriously doubt that.
The sum of your posts indicate that if faced with a threat, you’d be the first to turn tail and run to save yourself.
No need for “useless gestures of chivalry”, right?

dentarthurdent on March 4, 2014 at 4:15 PM

If man and woman are looking out for and protecting each other, then it’s not chivalry; it’s equality. If only one is expected to make the sacrifices, then it is chivalry (and, yes, misandrist). I believe that is Bill’s point.

I could try to tell my wife to run – but she wouldn’t – she’s a tempermental redhead and she has her own CCW (but doesn’t always carry) – and would definitely use it if someone pi$$ed her off.

Although I would be in front of her to begin with, I doubt she would stay behind me.
But because she doesn’t always carry her own, I’ve tried to get her to practice more with my CCWs, just so she knows how to use them if I get hit and she has to pick up my weapon to carry on the fight.

I hope the fellows who are defending the fleeing man will forewarn the women in their lives–mothers, wives, girlfriends, daughters–than when facing danger, the women are on their own.

DrMagnolias on March 4, 2014 at 4:51 PM

You conveniently leave out that this cowardly runner-awayer beta-male quickly got help. I want to kill those who intend to harm my loved ones as much as the next guy, but, we didn’t know the situation, and I’m not going to second guess him. You don’t know if he was motivated by cowardice. We barely know the first thing about what happened. We do know his wife and unborn child are alive and well.

If man and woman are looking out for and protecting each other, then it’s not chivalry; it’s equality. If only one is expected to make the sacrifices, then it is chivalry (and, yes, misandrist). I believe that is Bill’s point.

bmmg39 on March 4, 2014 at 5:15 PM

I don’t get that at all from any of his posts.
IMHO – He’s just trying to justify this coward running, likely because he would do the same – just to save himself – cuz nobody else matters.

If man and woman are looking out for and protecting each other, then it’s not chivalry; it’s equality. If only one is expected to make the sacrifices, then it is chivalry (and, yes, misandrist). I believe that is Bill’s point.

bmmg39 on March 4, 2014 at 5:15 PM

The problem with Bill’s assertion then is that things are not all equal. A man is better equipped to deal with physical threats than a woman is. And as far as I can tell, the woman didn’t run off and leave the ‘hero.”

And yes things being equal, I would protect my husband, but the fact that we had young – my husband would protect me while I got myself and MY CHILDREN out of harms way. T

I would have a very hard time running–I can’t imagine leaving my husband; however, the idea that I would ever be a detriment or get him harmed because I defied his instruction is hard to live with. Both he and I have CC, but we don’t always carry–for example when we walk around our neighborhood (although we probably should–no neighborhood is completely safe).

LashRambo on March 4, 2014 at 5:18 PM

There was no “convenient” leave-out–I consider what he did inexcusable, so what you consider mitigating I consider a sorry excuse for this coward. Essentially, what melle1228 said at 5:23.

The problem with Bill’s assertion then is that things are not all equal. A man is better equipped to deal with physical threats than a woman is. And as far as I can tell, the woman didn’t run off and leave the ‘hero.”

And yes things being equal, I would protect my husband, but the fact that we had young – my husband would protect me while I got myself and MY CHILDREN out of harms way. T

melle1228 on March 4, 2014 at 5:20 PM

I believe you completely when you say you’d protect your husband.

I know men are, on average, anyway, stronger than women. But this did involve three assailants with guns. That tends to equalize things a bit more.

And it could have ended very differently – as many other cases have shown. She was lucky this time. Next time he runs, she and her kid(s)may not survive.

dentarthurdent on March 4, 2014 at 5:24 PM

I ain’t all that smart but I do understand that you don’t judge behaviour by an outcome. As you guys are starting to figure out I like to use me as an example sometimes. Back in the ’60s and ’70’s, drinking and driving was ignored. We got “one for the road” all the time. Sad, but true. Since I never was in a wreck, hit someone, hurt someone, or killed someone while being drunk behind the wheel…..and the outcome was always good…guess my actions were good to go. No, I was an idiot and lucky I did not kill somebody.

Again, I don’t judge behavior only on outcome. Have the statutes of limitations run out by now?

I copied this from a blog a couple of years ago because I found it so powerful. I’ve adjusted some of the language for brevity:

“Klagenfurt, Austria, is a beautiful ancient place—once a Roman fort—situated in a deep, gorgeous Alpine valley. There is a plaque on the town wall, next to one of the main gates. Translated from the German, it commemorates a day in the 1600’s when the town was surrounded by an immense Turkish army, bent on death and destruction. The town was completely isolated and on its own. The men of the town, seeing that defense was impossible against such a horde, all sallied forth in a body to do battle. They were slaughtered, to the last boy. The plaque said nothing of what happened next. One can only imagine.”

That is the history of manliness in Western Civilization. That is why this story is so appalling–that is how far we have fallen.

Who was it that was scolding us for having a herd mentality toward casting judgement on her “boy”friend for supposedly heroically running away and coming back with help?

Oh, yeah….

The news reports seem to indicate police were there in minutes. If he’d stayed with her, and they demanded the apartment key, and they all went in, their chances of dying go way up. Or if he refuses to give them the key.

It could just as well have been written, “the male victim took control of the situation, risking his own life to save that of his female companion, escaping long enough to summon the police, who quickly arrested the two perpetrators. The quick-thinking hero likely saved both of their lives.”

You want to go with the Jazz storyline, go ahead. Or, you can think for yourself. I thought that’s what conservatives did.

It could just as well have been written, “the male victim took control of the situation, risking his own life to save that of his female companion, escaping long enough to summon the police, who quickly arrested the two perpetrators. The quick-thinking hero likely saved both of their lives.”

Except that he didn’t take control of the situation, he didn’t risk his own life to save his female companion’s, he didn’t escape long enough to summon police, he wasn’t quick-thinking, he wasn’t a hero, and he didn’t save both of their lives.

You want to go with the Jazz storyline, go ahead. Or, you can think for yourself. I thought that’s what conservatives did.

The robbers had control. Then he took control, they lost control — it no longer went the way they planned it. That’s what happened.

he didn’t risk his own life to save his female companion’s,

News reports says someone put a shotgun in his face and told him to give it up. You run away from that, you’re risking your life.

he didn’t escape long enough to summon police,

A news report said that’s exactly what he did. Another report said a passerby alerted police. Who knows? WE DON’T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.

he wasn’t quick-thinking,

A split second decision to seek help, rather than go along. Very quick-thinking.

he wasn’t a hero,

Hard to say, not knowing the situation, but some plausible narratives say he was.

and he didn’t save both of their lives.

They’re both alive, aren’t they?

You want to go with the Jazz storyline, go ahead. Or, you can think for yourself. I thought that’s what conservatives did.

LashRambo on March 4, 2014 at 12:18 PM

You thought Conservatives made crap up as they went?

Lime in the Coconut on March 4, 2014 at 7:06 PM

Made up what?

A thought experiment. Imagine there existed a course of action for the guy to save both of their lives. Police give advice — give up the goods, don’t go to a secondary crime scene, otherwise comply. They have experience. They don’t know, but those are the percentages.

Then you’ve got the victim who’ll fight back, who says “I’m not going to let anyone rob me”. Fine. He’s a hero in his own mind. And then, he gets shot dead. The police will think, OK, he was an idiot. Headstrong. What do you do. He’s dead now. Maybe the woman is dead too, killed to eliminate an eyewitness. Maybe the police would caution against running, too, for the same reason. I mean, who knows what was the right course of action. We weren’t there. He escaped and alerted the police. It turned out well.

Now he’s got to contend with people who say he was a coward. If I were him, I’d think “who cares, what do they know”.

Another thought experiment. I’m standing next to my friend who is exceptionally vulnerable at the moment. In fact, we’re on our way to the hospital. In fact, a moment ago, my friend was leaning on my arm and I was asking him or her, “Are you OK?”

We’re attacked by two men who threaten violence unless we give them our things. I run away and leave my friend to deal with them.

I’m not sure it’s even a male/female dynamic issue.

The conclusion that I’m doing it, me being male and my friend being female, to make a statement about society’s hatred of men — that seems like a slight reach. The conclusion that I was fast on my feet and instinctively turned Spider Man, jumped behind a garbage can and opened a line to the police before being recollected by the bad guys — that seems downright Hollywood.

I’m with you that the news is as reliable and truth-filled as a Friday Mosque service in Afghanistan. But there’s nothing in the reported story that suggests the less likely scenarios are the right ones — that it was a political act, or that, discretion being the better part of valor, and cowardice being the better part of discretion, he valiantly hid himself in the closet.

It looks like he saved himself by offering his more vulnerable friend. That would be what it amounts to if he fled in fear. The joke, “I don’t have to outrun the dinosaur — I just have to outrun you” played out in real time.

Whatever happened aside, looking over the thread, if people can’t agree that protecting the vulnerable is noble — we’re probably completely baked.

Whatever happened aside, looking over the thread, if people can’t agree that protecting the vulnerable is noble — we’re probably completely baked.

Lime in the Coconut on March 4, 2014 at 9:27 PM

I figure most men, charged with protecting their wife or child, have within them the capacity for aggression and great violence if that’s what they have to do to protect their loved one. Again, with most men, after they cross that line, I doubt there’s any thought of their personal safety or even life. I don’t know what was in his mind. You could say, he didn’t have it in him to do it, he’s a coward. I really hesitate to think poorly of people. He wasn’t the criminal. If you think he’s going to kill 3 armed men, that’s just a fantasy. Bottom line, I don’t understand why people are so quick to think the worst of this guy. All we know is a couple of paragraphs in a news story.

You conveniently leave out that this cowardly runner-awayer beta-male quickly got help. I want to kill those who intend to harm my loved ones as much as the next guy, but, we didn’t know the situation, and I’m not going to second guess him. You don’t know if he was motivated by cowardice. We barely know the first thing about what happened. We do know his wife and unborn child are alive and well.

LashRambo on March 4, 2014 at 5:18 PM

WE have a winner. Someone who actually bothered to find out the facts.

If man and woman are looking out for and protecting each other, then it’s not chivalry; it’s equality. If only one is expected to make the sacrifices, then it is chivalry (and, yes, misandrist). I believe that is Bill’s point.

Look, you’re only trying to save what little masculinity you have left. If you want to think that the guy did the right thing by running away, fine. You have the right to be a coward and a liar but you’re only digging your own hole deeper by justifying your position.

I’m one of the first to play contrarian on here many times, and I’ve taken my share of heat for it (particualrly about ‘abusive cop’ stories). But you’ve been shown (by reference to other news sources) that your hypothetical is really not supportable. Continuing in that vein pretty much just shows that you’re 10 pounds of fertilizer in a 5 pound bag. Dentarthurdent has you pegged (as does melle).

You conveniently leave out that this cowardly runner-awayer beta-male quickly got help. I want to kill those who intend to harm my loved ones as much as the next guy, but, we didn’t know the situation, and I’m not going to second guess him. You don’t know if he was motivated by cowardice. We barely know the first thing about what happened. We do know his wife and unborn child are alive and well.

LashRambo on March 4, 2014 at 5:18 PM
WE have a winner. Someone who actually bothered to find out the facts.

If man and woman are looking out for and protecting each other, then it’s not chivalry; it’s equality. If only one is expected to make the sacrifices, then it is chivalry (and, yes, misandrist). I believe that is Bill’s point.

bmmg39 on March 4, 2014 at 5:15 PM
Yes it is, thank you for taking the time to think about this.